paying for a harbour view... only to have it blocked by new buildings
- Thread starter auror
- Start date
I think there will be some similarly sad people at Wolli Creek in Sydney down the track.
a lesson for all - nobody owns the view.
if the proposed development complies then - imo - there is nothing the residents can do.
the only way to ensure your views is to either buy on the top of the hill, or buy right next to what it is you are viewing (so no one can build in between).
as for the salesman - spin city
if the proposed development complies then - imo - there is nothing the residents can do.
the only way to ensure your views is to either buy on the top of the hill, or buy right next to what it is you are viewing (so no one can build in between).
as for the salesman - spin city
+1 here Y-man.
you don't PAY for a view unless there is ZERO ANYTHING between you and the coast.
period.
Even that doesn't work - they fill in the water with landfill, reclaim the land and build another tower further out to the water...
Cheers,
The Y-man
Could always get a mobile home.
Just move it when the view changes.
Just move it when the view changes.
OOOOH carnie style.
I have a mate who is an architect. He did a $1m reno on a unit near that one a couple of years ago.
There is generally no right to a view in NSW if the structure blocking it is compliant with the relevant planning controls. however, the Land and Environment Court found, in Tenacity v Warringah, that there is a right to a view if the view is iconic. This is the line that the objectors lawyer is quite rightly pursing. The view of the bridge and the Opera hous is held by the court to be iconic.
There is another way, in the City of Sydney, (this particular case is in north sydney) to ensure your view is not built out. Buy into something that has a heritage building immediately between you and the view. Check to see if "transferable heritage floor space" (THFS) has been paid on the said heritage building, If so, the height, bulk and floorspace of said heritage building is FROZEN in perpetuity as these rights to a large building have been bought by a developer and transfered to another site. The normal building height can no longer be achieved. There is a heritage floorspace register so you can check if these rights have been sold off as part of your due diligence.
I'm not sure if THFS is available in other cities but Sydney has it for sure and it is losly based on an idea out of New York City.
Listening to developer saying it is alright because they own the land is a nonsense. A covenant on title would be the very least you would require to believe them.
those poor people whotrusted them.*sigh*
There is another way, in the City of Sydney, (this particular case is in north sydney) to ensure your view is not built out. Buy into something that has a heritage building immediately between you and the view. Check to see if "transferable heritage floor space" (THFS) has been paid on the said heritage building, If so, the height, bulk and floorspace of said heritage building is FROZEN in perpetuity as these rights to a large building have been bought by a developer and transfered to another site. The normal building height can no longer be achieved. There is a heritage floorspace register so you can check if these rights have been sold off as part of your due diligence.
I'm not sure if THFS is available in other cities but Sydney has it for sure and it is losly based on an idea out of New York City.
Listening to developer saying it is alright because they own the land is a nonsense. A covenant on title would be the very least you would require to believe them.
those poor people whotrusted them.*sigh*
My thoughts exactly... I kinda feel sorry for them (the apartment buyers) for taking their word...but then again they should have looked and researched further into it.
you can't feel sorry for folk who don't do their DD - regardless if they have a child who is in full time care. tha's just the angle to get your emotions playing.
i smell a TT or ACA special.
i smell a TT or ACA special.
the samething happened in Canberra. Capital Towers was built about 15 or so years ago and boasted some incredible 180 degree views of the lake - so people bought into it.
About 12 months ago, many of those owners were up in arms as a new apartment building was being planned which was going to take the views of the southern basin away. As a result, many of those people who had 180 degrees of the lake complained and went to the media and tried to have a real song'n'dance about how they were told by the agents that the views would never get built out. They threatened legal action blah blah blah.
Now, as i sit at my desk, I occasionally gaze out my window and watch the new apartment building going up and slowly rising to its estimated 18 stories and slowly blocking the views of the southern basin (as planned) and I laugh to myself about those silly fools who believed what the agent told them - that the views would never get built out.
If they didn't want the views built out, then they should've bought the block front of them.
Oh well.
g
About 12 months ago, many of those owners were up in arms as a new apartment building was being planned which was going to take the views of the southern basin away. As a result, many of those people who had 180 degrees of the lake complained and went to the media and tried to have a real song'n'dance about how they were told by the agents that the views would never get built out. They threatened legal action blah blah blah.
Now, as i sit at my desk, I occasionally gaze out my window and watch the new apartment building going up and slowly rising to its estimated 18 stories and slowly blocking the views of the southern basin (as planned) and I laugh to myself about those silly fools who believed what the agent told them - that the views would never get built out.
If they didn't want the views built out, then they should've bought the block front of them.
Oh well.
g
Similar threads
